[Pramāṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/) › [Indian literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in) › [Buddhist Literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha) › [Taishō Tripiṭaka (Chinese Buddhist canon)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho) › [大般涅槃經疏](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1767) › 7.14 # 大般涅槃經疏 7.14 大般涅槃經疏 7.14 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [7.14](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1767.7.14) 三從「善男子汝今」下，即是身行慈也。舊云：照人為一、天為二、五道為五。又云：常光為一、非常光為二、面門三、眉間四、通身為五（云云）。從「善男子未可見法」去，明來世行慈。而言比丘糾治者，比丘護法，文為四：一標來世、二明持毀、三譬、四結。初二可見。第三譬中言暴惡者，譬破戒人。會遇重病者，譬所犯彰露。隣王興兵者，譬持戒糾治。病王無力者，毀禁惡止。恐怖修善者，明其得益。譬中有三，三種何異？初為各住各學行非法者，故以隣王為喻。次為同住各學行非法者，故以宅樹為喻。後為同住同學行非法者，故以白髮為喻。又解：斷四住惡解惑相治，如除隣王。斷塵沙惡除體上垢，如除毒樹。斷無明惡同體之惑，如除白髮（云云）。四「若善」下，結。即判真偽。不治毀禁壞亂佛法，佛法中怨。無慈詐親，是彼人怨。能糾治者，是護法聲聞，真我弟子，為彼除惡即是彼親。 > Third, from "Good man, you now..." onward is the physical practice of friendliness. The ancient \[masters\] said: illuminating humans is the first, devas is the second, and the five destinies is the fifth. They also said: the constant light is the first, the extraordinary light is the second, the mouth is the third, between the eyebrows is the fourth, and the whole body is the fifth (and so forth). From "Good man, dharmas not yet seen..." onward clarifies the practice of friendliness in future lives. As for speaking of monks investigating and disciplining, monks protect the Dharma; the text has four parts: first, marking the future life; second, clarifying keeping and violating \[precepts\]; third, analogies; fourth, conclusion. The first two are evident. In the third, the analogies, speaking of the violent and evil person is an analogy for one who breaks the precepts. Encountering severe illness is an analogy for the offense becoming exposed. A neighboring king raising troops is an analogy for precept-holders investigating and disciplining. The sick king lacking strength is the evil of violating prohibitions being halted. Being terrified and cultivating goodness clarifies their attaining benefit. There are three analogies; how do the three kinds differ? First, for those who live separately and study separately yet practice non-Dharma, the neighboring king is used as an analogy. Next, for those who live together but study separately yet practice non-Dharma, the house tree is used as an analogy. Finally, for those who live together and study together yet practice non-Dharma, the white hair is used as an analogy. Another explanation says: severing the evil of the four entrenchments, where understanding and delusion counteract each other, is like removing the neighboring king. Severing the evil of dust-and-sand, removing defilements on the essence, is like removing the poisonous tree. Severing the evil of ignorance, delusion of identical essence, is like removing the white hair (and so forth). Fourth, from "If a good..." onward is the conclusion, which judges the genuine and the false. Not disciplining those who violate prohibitions corrupts and disrupts the Buddhadharma, making one an enemy within the Buddhadharma. Lacking friendliness and feigning affection makes one an enemy of that person. One who can investigate and discipline is a Dharma-protecting śrāvaka, truly my disciple; removing evil for that person is precisely being their true kin. > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 7.13](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1767.7.13) - [Next: 7.15](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1767.7.15) - [Up: 7](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1767.7) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1767~en-mt.7.14) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1767.7.14](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1767.7.14) · Pramāṇa